tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post115379431508054847..comments2023-06-11T06:03:12.069-05:00Comments on Think In Pictures: Adventures In Visual Education: Visualizing Dissent: Graffiti As ArtJeremiah McNicholshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11586987877676673757noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-64388081895664979702010-12-03T19:05:53.699-06:002010-12-03T19:05:53.699-06:00I am working on a paper for school on Graffiti and...I am working on a paper for school on Graffiti and was looking up the word Vandalism, it comes from the 5th century: a east germanic tribe called the Vandals, when they invaded Rome they destroyed staues and artwork. This was common during the time as a way of claiming space but the Vandals were the ones whose name coined the term. I find it interesting that the word is now used against graffiti artists.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-11709820821138853552008-02-20T18:48:00.000-06:002008-02-20T18:48:00.000-06:00First of all, I really enjoyed your knowledgeable ...First of all, I really enjoyed your knowledgeable reflections regarding the post "Visualizing Dissent: Graffiti as Art," response to graffiti cleanup in San Francisco. I especially enjoyed the parallel you drew between the Stanley Steemer Carpet Cleaner commercial, where the housewife is boasting about the cleanliness of the servicemen who come to clean her already spotless house and the idea that the conflict of graffiti essentially boils down to a class-based conflict and/or insensitivity. The increasing visuality of our culture, because of mediums such as the internet, has posed some interesting situations regarding illegal, yet controversial, expression such as graffiti. While I can understand the arguments against public graffiti, I find it hard, considering the fickleness of advertising, to reason with the illegality of the public art, graffiti. Unlike advertisements that can continually airbrush a model or even commercials that can airbrush movement to the point where the model is subhuman and unrealistic, graffiti is the real deal, an argument and expression in and of itself. It is truthful in its original form. Unlike advertising, graffiti or any other form of public art does no need to be altered to be appreciated , it is original and that is half of the message being expressed. The artists who compose graffiti are doing so because they need to express a world view or communicate a message that otherwise would not be heard. In that way it can be considered a line of communication. What right do we have to regulate graffiti, while not regulating or at least agreeing to the placement of the cigarette or alcohol advertisements (see picture to the right) I see everyday on my way to school? Graffiti inspires the audience not just to look, but to truly see the visual vocabulary and practice behind the images drawn. While I believe the strength of graffiti is in expression, I think context has the ability to completely sway the appreciation. Take, for example, graffiti placed on a white wall in a Los Angeles museum. Now, imagine graffiti written in French at a center in Montreal, on brick "urban canvas." Next, imagine preserved graffiti in Warsaw, done on "ruins," where the paint is slowly peeling away. These images present the importance of understanding the context in discovering the background and underlying circumstances that created the need for expression. Understanding the artist's message and context, to me, is key to understanding or at least identifying the need behind such expression. In looking at the picture to left in support of the cleanup project, a private bathroom in a home is no context or argument where graffiti can be regulated. Therefore, I see little that is actually being advertised.CHHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18069318548017837922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-1158922680124472632006-09-22T05:58:00.000-05:002006-09-22T05:58:00.000-05:00I'll grant you, Hum, that there is a tension betwe...I'll grant you, Hum, that there is a tension between commercialism and dissent in the graffiti scene, but a graffiti fansite's founder having a day job in grassroots marketing is not an indictable offense. If Schiller were contracting graffiti artists to produce advertising messages, like Moose (Paul Curtis), I would see a clear conflict. What Curtis does is paid vandalism for advertisers, that is, using public or private non-messaged space for private commercial messaging, free of charge - turning walls and sidewalks into billboards for computer and shoe companies. (The fact that he is cleaning the surface rather than painting it is really insignificant - both require expensive cleanup efforts.) <BR/><BR/>I lived in San Francisco in the late '90s, and was there to see the explosion in so-called guerrilla advertising, which basically meant having to stare at pervasive campaigns of commercial stencil art for months that turned into years because the city could not afford to clean it all up. The Symbollix (Moose's "clean graffiti" advertising company) "Size?" campaign for some shoe company really took me back to those aggravating days - there should be a special jail sentence for graffiti artists who are caught creating advertising. But to indict a fan of graffiti art simply because he started a marketing business, and keeps the two worlds strictly segregated? Unless you know something you aren't saying here, you have no legitimate complaint.<BR/><BR/>And your idea that art critics doubling as art collectors is a scandalous conflict of interest is frankly absurd. Very few art critics wield any significant influence on a personal level - their acclaim is hollow if it is not recognized and echoed by others. True, an individual critic can draw attention to an otherwise unrecognized artist, and if they collected that artist's work as well they could stand to gain from it. But please, don't give us so much credit. The prospect of critics beyond those at maybe ten publications in the world having enough influence over prices to make buying art and then pitching its value to others as a money-making venture is the stuff of fantasy. Many of us can't even afford to buy the work of the emerging artists we cover, and when we do, it's because we love it.Jeremiah McNicholshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11586987877676673757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-1158883647314602772006-09-21T19:07:00.000-05:002006-09-21T19:07:00.000-05:00Background to the Wooster Collective About Electri...Background to the Wooster Collective<BR/> <BR/><BR/>About ElectricArtists (This is the advertising corporation for which<BR/>Marc Schiller, Wooster Collective's co-founder, is a CEO.)<BR/><BR/>Description:<BR/><BR/>Overview<BR/>ElectricArtists is an innovative marketing services company that <BR/>develops and implements unique "community based" marketing campaigns.<BR/>Led by a team of seasoned marketing executives, ElectricArtists<BR/>fosters and nurtures relationships with a client's most influential <BR/>audience by providing the tastemakers with brand information that<BR/>triggers consumers talking to each other and spreading the word. Since<BR/>1997 ElectricArtists has seen 100% growth in profits each year while<BR/>serving a diverse list of blue chip clients in the global media and <BR/>entertainment sectors including Ralston-Purina, Levis, Sony Pictures,<BR/>and BMG Entertainment. ElectricArtists success has been given<BR/>extensive media coverage with features in Forbes, Time, Billboard,<BR/>Variety, ABC's World News Tonight, and others. The company has <BR/>expanded from its New York base with offices in Japan and England,<BR/>thus enabling ElectricArtists to develop and deliver global marketing<BR/>campaigns.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Strategic Philosophy<BR/>By targeting the "ideal customers" and providing exciting brand <BR/>messages, from behind-the-scenes news to downloadable samples,<BR/>ElectricArtists converts fans into loyalists and ultimately, into<BR/>advocates. Meanwhile, clients gain valuable market research insight<BR/>and honest consumer feedback. EA manages the trust and credibility of <BR/>your brand so that your message is heard and believed above the<BR/>clutter. Yet, the success of our strategies has everything to do with<BR/>you. ElectricArtists considers our efforts part of the bigger<BR/>marketing picture-if the other marketing pistons are firing, our<BR/>efforts will be considerably more effective.<BR/><BR/>( www.electricartists.com/corporate/about/)<BR/><BR/>-------------------<BR/><BR/>"Too much "space" in our urban cities is sold to advertisers and large<BR/>corporations. Street artists are trying to reclaim a bit of their <BR/>space, even if it means doing it without the approval of the people<BR/>who control that space."<BR/>Marc Schiller, co-founder of Wooster Collective [and a street-arts<BR/>collector himself]<BR/><BR/>( http://training.sessions.edu/resources/interviews/interviews/marc_schiller.asp)<BR/><BR/>Some of the corporate clients ElectricArtists have worked for include: Warner Bros.,<BR/>Microsoft, Sony and CNN.<BR/>Go to ElectricArtists client's page to get an even deeper look. <BR/>http://www.electricartists.com/corporate/clients/ <BR/><BR/>-------------------<BR/><BR/>I mean it is just kind of incredible that street artists are so stupid<BR/>to get on board with this fuck. It makes a bit of sense, but how is<BR/>street art under the hospice of Wooster Collective not the biggest <BR/>scam?<BR/><BR/>This is a rhetorical question presuming that the street artist is a<BR/>self-interested paranoiac, who wants to be seen plastering the streets<BR/>with their art wares. Who enters the market as a somnambulist, too <BR/>awake to put on a McDonald's hat, but too asleep to stop flipping<BR/>burgers. That is, the street artist is smart enough to feel disturbed<BR/>and want to change the commercialism of their city-scape, but instead<BR/>becomes beauticians in a competition with capital--where ultimately <BR/>selling their look lands them in the commercial seat which started out<BR/>disturbing them.<BR/><BR/>Kind of sounds like a recipe for street artist burn-out while the<BR/>collectors, museums and street art vendors make money off playing the <BR/>art market. Of course a good collector will do their best to promote<BR/>their artist. Selling them out to the largest corporations will<BR/>garner the largest return value for the collector.<BR/><BR/>That is why the collector will try to get their artists into museums, <BR/>in books, and out into the targeted underground. The underground is<BR/>particularly important since this is the life blood of capital, where<BR/>the collector's money places bets, like the chips on a roulette board,<BR/>where that which is new, and up and coming, will pay off with profits.<BR/><BR/>It is just as important that the collector hypes up his product. Be<BR/>it in magazines, gallery shows, over the Internet, in museums, or<BR/>through private purchase, the art needs to be sold. But everywhere it <BR/>is the same, the marketer's pockets bulge.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-1154484472496647112006-08-01T21:07:00.000-05:002006-08-01T21:07:00.000-05:00I hope you understood from my post that I believe ...I hope you understood from my post that I believe many are doing far more creative things with graffiti than "tagging." Splitting up my main arguments - that graffiti art is an often meaningful form of protest, and that "fine art" can learn much from graffiti art beyond pillaging its sense of style, may have left some readers in the lurch.<BR/><BR/>I knew a kid in high school who "tagged" - middle class kid, some family problems but very much of privilege. I understand that the urge to destroy things is not inherently political, as well as that there are many things which we feel shared ownership of - homes, apartment buildings, neighborhood shops - which do not represent "corporate power" etc. etc. to us or to taggers. Sorry if that didn't come across.Jeremiah McNicholshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11586987877676673757noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29552770.post-1154114625229060122006-07-28T14:23:00.000-05:002006-07-28T14:23:00.000-05:00I live in the city of Midtown, Atlanta and we have...I live in the city of Midtown, Atlanta and we have a graffiti problem that saddens me. <BR/><BR/>To this statement:<BR/>"They write for themselves, and other writers,..." Says it all. Without any concern for the community around them or the people who live in the envrionment, they leave THEIR marks on public areas. You say it's a message I say it's selfish.<BR/><BR/>Over a period of 2 years we had a tagger in our apartment building that was nice enough to do $3,000 worth of damage to both of our stainless steel elevators, just so he could see his initals whenever he visted his friends. When we finally caught him he had no reason for doing it just a shoulder shrug. I've seen his same initials all over Buckhead, Midtown and Downtown.<BR/><BR/>Maybe graffiti serves a purpose, or releases a frustration, whatever. If these artists would like to spray over all billboard ads, bus ads, etc. to "make a statement" about feeling helpless in "system" go right ahead. <BR/><BR/>If they would like to contact others with the same frustraton with the "system"...start a club.<BR/><BR/>Graffiti on apartments, elevators, automobiles, office buildings, and so on crosses the line of MY FREEDOM to live in a clean and safe environment.<BR/><BR/>There are many ways for artists to use their skills for the better of a community...I suggest they be more creative and find a way to do that versus imposing their message in my community.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com